UEFA Club Licensing. – To Comply or not to Comply ?
On 16 April 2018 The UEFA Club Financial Control Body (CFCB) adjudicatory chamber took decisions in the cases of four clubs that had been referred to it by the CFCB chief investigator, concerning the non-fulfilment of the club licensing criteria defined in the UEFA Club Licensing and Financial Fair Play Regulations.
Such criteria must be complied with by the clubs in order to be granted the licence required to enter the UEFA club competitions.
The cases of two clubs::
Olympique des Alpes SA (Sion Switzerland )
and
FC Irtysh (Kazakhstan)
are of particular interest to those following the events under which the SFA awarded a UEFA License to Rangers FC in 2011 currently under investigation by the SFA Compliance Officer because
- The case documentation tell us how UEFA wish national associations to apply UEFA FFP rules
- The cases tell us what might have happened to Rangers FC in 2012 had they not gone into liquidation and as a consequence avoided the same type of sanctions that UEFA applied to Sion and Irtysh.
FC Sion (Olympique des Alpes SA)
Here we are told how the Swiss FL and then the UEFA CFCB acted in respect of FC Sion in 2017 where a misleading statement was made in the Sion UEFA licensing application.
Full details can be read at
but this is a summary.
In April 2017 the Swiss FL (SFL) granted a licence to Sion FC but indicated that a Disciplinary case was pending.
In July 2017 the CFCB, as part of their licence auditing programme, carried out a compliance audit on 3 clubs to determine if licences had been properly awarded. Sion was one of those clubs.
The subsequent audit by Deloitte LLP discovered Sion had an overdue payable on a player, amounting to €950,000, owed to another football club (FC Sochaux ) at 31st March 2017 as a result of a transfer undertaken by Sion before 31st December 2016, although the €950,000 was paid in early June 2017.
Deloitte produced a draft report of their findings that was passed to SFL and Sion for comment on factual accuracy and comment on the findings. Sion responded quickly enabling Deloitte to present a final report to the CFCB Investigation Unit. In response to the Deloitte final report Sion stated:
“il apparaît aujourd’hui qu’il existait bel et bien un engagement impayé découlant d’une activité de transfert. Ce point est admis” translated as
“it now appears that there was indeed an outstanding commitment arising from transfer activity. This is admitted”
What emerged as the investigation proceeded was that the Swiss FL Licensing Committee, after granting the license in April and as a result of a Sochaux complaint of non-payment to FIFA, had reason to refer Sion’s application to their Disciplinary Commission in May 2017 with regard to the submission of potentially misleading information by FC Sion to the SFL on 7th April 2017 as part of its licensing documentation.
Sion had declared
“Written confirmation: no overdue payables arising from transfer activities”, signed by the Club’s president, stating that as at 31 March 2017 there were no overdue payables towards other football clubs. In particular, the Club indicated that the case between FC Sion and FC Sochaux regarding the transfer of the player Ishmael Yartey was still under dispute.
The SFL Disciplinary Commission came to the conclusion that FC Sion had no intention to mislead the SFL, but indeed submitted some incorrect licensing documentation; the SFL Disciplinary Commission further confirmed that the total amount of €950,000 had been paid by the Club to FC Sochaux on 7 June 2017. Because of the inaccurate information submitted, the SFL Disciplinary Commission decided to impose a fine of CHF 8,000 on the Club.
Whilst this satisfied the SFL Disciplinary process the CFCB deemed it not enough to justify the granting of the licence as UEFA intended their FFP rules to be applied.
Sion provided the CFCB with a number of reasons on the basis of which no sanction should be imposed. In particular, the Club admitted that there was an overdue payable as at 31 March 2017, but stated that the mistake in the document dated 7 April 2017 was the result of a misinterpretation by the club’s responsible person for dealing with the licence (the “Club’s licence manager”), who is not a lawyer. The Club affirmed that it never had the intention to conceal the information and had provisioned the amount due for payment and that, in any case, it has already been sanctioned by the SFL for providing the wrong information.
The CFCB Investigation Unit accepted that the Sion application, although inaccurate, was a one off misrepresentation and not a forgery, (as in intended to deceive ) but that nevertheless an overdue payable did exist at 31st March and a licence should not have been granted.
Based on their findings, the CFCB Chief Investigator decided to refer the case to the CFCB Adjudicatory Chamber and suggested a disciplinary measure to be imposed on FC Sion by the CFCB Adjudicatory Chamber, such measure consisting of a fine of €235,000, corresponding to the UEFA Revenues the Club gained by participating in the 2017/2018 UEFA Europa League.
The CFCB Investigatory Chamber submitted that it was appropriate to impose a fine corresponding to all the UEFA revenues the Club gained by participating in the competition considering the fact that FC Sion should not have been admitted to the competition for failing to meet one of its admission criteria.
The Adjudicatory Chambers took all the circumstances (see paras 91 to 120 at http://tiny.cc/i8sxsy ) into consideration and reached the following key decisions.
- FC Sion failed to satisfy the requirements of Article 49(1) of the CL&FFP Regulations and it obtained the licence issued by the SFL not in accordance with the CL&FFP Regulations.
- FC Sion breached Articles 13(1) and 43(1)(i) of the CL&FFP Regulations. (Documents complete and correct)
- To exclude FC Sion from participating in the next UEFA club competition for which it would otherwise qualify in the next two (2) seasons (i.e. the 2018/19 and 2019/20).
- To impose a fine of two hundred and thirty five thousand Euros (€235,000) on FC Sion.
- FC Sion is to pay three thousand Euros (€3,000) towards the costs of these proceedings.
Comment in respect of the award of a UEFA Licence in 2011 to Rangers FC.
It is now public knowledge that an actual liability of tax due before 31stDecember 2010 towards HMRC, was admitted by Rangers FC before 31st March 2011.
This liability was described as “potential” in Rangers Interim accounts audited by Grant Thornton.
“Note 1: The exceptional item reflects a provision for a potential tax liability in relation to a Discounted Option Scheme associated with player contributions between 1999 and 2003. A provision for interest of £0.9m has also been included within the interest charge.”
The English Oxford Dictionary definition of potential is:
Having or showing the capacity to develop into something in the future.
Which was not true as the liability had already been “developed” so could not be potential.
This was repeated by Chairman Alistair Johnson in his covering Interim Accounts statement
“The exceptional item reflects a provision for a potential tax liability in relation to a Discounted Option Scheme associated with player contributions between 1999 and 2003. “ where he also added
“Discussions are continuing with HMRC to establish a resolution to the assessments raised.”
This could be taken as disputing the liability but In fact the resolution to the assessments raised would have been payment of the actual liability, something that never happened.
In the Sion case it was accepted the misleading statement was a one off misrepresentation, but at the monitoring stages at June 2011 in Ranger’s case the status of the liability continued to be misrepresented and in September the continuing discussions reason was repeated, along with a claim of an instalment paid whose veracity is highly questionable.
The Swiss FL Licensing Committee did at least refer the case to their Disciplinary Committee when they realised a misleading statement might have been made. The SFA however in August 2011, when Sherriff Officers called at Ibrox for payment of the overdue tax , did no such thing and pulled up the drawbridge for six years, one that the Compliance Officer is now finally charged with lowering.
The case of FC Irtysh of Kazakhstan is set out in full at http://tiny.cc/y9sxsy and is a bit more straightforward but is nevertheless useful to compare with events in 2011 in Scotland.
Unlike Rangers FC , FC Irtysh properly disclosed that they had an overdue payable to the Kazakhstan tax authorities at the monitoring point at 30th June 2017. This caused the CFCB Investigatory Unit to seek further information with regard to the position at 31st March
It transpired that Irtysh had declared an overdue payable at 31st March but cited their financial position (awaiting sponsor money) as a reason for non payment to the Kazakhstan FA who accepted it and granted the licence. The outstanding tax was paid in September 2107.
The outcome of the CFCB Investigation was a case put to the CFCB Adjudicatory Chamber who agreed with the CFCB Investigation Unit that a licence should not have been granted and recommended that Irtysh be fined the equivalent of the UEFA prize money, (that had been withheld in any case whilst CFCB investigated.)
The CFCB Adjudicatory Chamber however decided that a fine was not sufficient in sporting deterrent terms and ruled that:
- FC Irtysh failed to satisfy the requirements of Article 50bis(1) of the CL&FFP Regulations and it obtained the licence issued by the FFK not in accordance with the CL&FFP Regulations.
- To withhold four hundred and forty thousand Euros (€440,000) corresponding to the UEFA revenues FC Irtysh gained by participating in the 2017/2018 UEFA Europa League.
- To exclude FC Irtysh from participating in the next UEFA club competition for which it would otherwise qualify in the next three (3) seasons (i.e. the 2018/19, 2019/20 and 2020/21 seasons). This sanction is deferred for a probationary period of (3) three years. This exclusion must be enforced in case the Club participates again in a UEFA club competition having not fulfilled the licence criteria required to obtain the UEFA licence in accordance with the CL&FFP Regulations.
- FC Irtysh is to pay three thousand Euros (€3,000) towards the costs of these proceedings. “
The deferral was because unlike Rangers FC, FC Irtysh had properly disclosed to the licensor the correct & accurate financial information required, so the exclusion was deferred for a probationary period of (3) years.
Comment in respect of the award of a UEFA Licence in 2011 to Rangers FC.
From the foregoing it could be deduced that had Rangers FC qualified for the Champions League (or European League) and not gone bust as a result and so not entered liquidation BUT it became public knowledge by 2012 that a licence had been wrongly and possibly fraudulently granted then
- Rangers would have been fined the equivalent of their earnings from their participation in the UEFA competitions in 2011
- At least a two year ban from UEFA Competitions would have been imposed, but more likely three in view of repeated incorrect statements.
- The consequences of both would have been as damaging for Rangers survival as the real life consequences of losing to Malmo and Maribor in the qualifying rounds of the Champions and European Leagues.
Karma eh!
Interestingly in the UEFA COMPLIANCE AND INVESTIGATION ACTIVITY REPORT 2015 – 2017 , the CFCB investigatory chamber recommended that both the Kazakhstan FA and Swiss FA as licensors
“pay particular attention to the adequate disclosure of the outstanding amounts payable towards other football clubs, in respect of employees and towards social/tax authorities, which must be disclosed separately;
Would the same recommendation apply to the Scottish FA with regard to their performance in 2011 and will the SFA responses thereafter to shareholders in a member club be examined for compliance with best governance practice by the SFA Compliance Officer investigating the processing of the UEFA Licence in 2011?
This would be a welcome step in fully restoring trust in the SFA.
Easyjambo May 30th 2018 at 16.56
King’s response:
I am surprised at the SPFL’s response to my request for an independent investigation into the relationship of its chairman to major shareholders in Celtic FC. Any organisation that has behaved properly would welcome an independent and transparent review.
The SPFL’s response does not even attempt to answer why there was non-disclosure of the conflict that immediately arose when the SPFL chairman accepted this appointment. SPFL board members were informed that their chairman was taking up a non-executive directorship with another business but they were not told there was a conflict of interest due to common shareholders with significant influence within that company and Celtic FC.
We need to be told if the SPFL chairman chose not to disclose the conflict. If it transpires that he did in fact make the required disclosure then to whom did he address this and why did that person not relay this critical information to SPFL board members? Had the conflict been disclosed the SPFL board members could have carried out their fiduciary obligation by interrogating this conflict of interest and agreeing how the chairman would deal with it going forward. The existence of this conflict meansthat the SPFL chairman must recuse himself from much of the business of the SPFL going forward thereby rendering his present position as being not fit for purpose.
The SPFL’s rather hurried and inadequate response merely reinforces my personal view that good governance is not a priority for the SPFL executive. These questions must be addressed immediately if confidence is to be restored in the SPFL executive and its chairman.
There is manifestly some bad news from the SFA or SPFL regarding Rangers which Dave King knows is coming. The Euro licence seems the most likely. What he is seeking is to discredit Scottish football governance and then denounce the bad news, claim he is blaneless and set the rabid elements of his support against the governing bodies. He is simply trying to bully them into not sanctioning his club. Sadly, for Dave, I suspect the SFA hands are tied byUEFA here and a repeat of last year’s dodgy licence issuing will not be forthcoming. Consequences may be many fold here. The end game looks in sight and Dave intends to go down by razing everything in his path as he departs.
easyJamboMay 30, 2018 at 16:56
I see that King has now responded to the SPFL’s response. I’m afraid I can’t post the image from my phone (very easily).See tweet from @andynewportpa
____________
Just read it, but also can’t copy and paste it.
The man’s a fruitcake.
Talking of responses, have TRFC responded yet to the review of the 2011 Euro License? I’m sure they had until a date prior to the end of May (think it was before today) to give their response to the SFA.
Or is this yet another example of ‘transparency’, and the response has been made but we’ve not even been told that it has?
DK Statement. Cosmic Irony alert. Your ribs might get sore.
=============
“I am surprised at the SPFL’s response to my request for an independent investigation into the relationship of its chairman to major shareholders in Celtic FC.
“Any organisation that has behaved properly would welcome an independent and transparent review.
“The SPFL’s response does not even attempt to answer why there was non-disclosure of the conflict that immediately arose when the SPFL chairman accepted this appointment.
“SPFL board members were informed that their chairman was taking up a non-executive directorship with another business but they were not told there was a conflict of interest due to common shareholders with significant influence within that company and Celtic FC.
“We need to be told if the SPFL chairman chose not to disclose the conflict. If it transpires that he did in fact make the required disclosure then to whom did he address this and why did that person not relay this critical information to SPFL board members?
“Had the conflict been disclosed the SPFL board members could have carried out their fiduciary obligation by interrogating this conflict of interest and agreeing how the chairman would deal with it going forward.
“The existence of this conflict means that the SPFL chairman must recuse himself from much of the business of the SPFL going forward thereby rendering his present position as being not fit for purpose.
“The SPFL’s rather hurried and inadequate response merely reinforces my personal view that good governance is not a priority for the SPFL executive.
“These questions must be addressed immediately if confidence is to be restored in the SPFL executive and its chairman.”
AllyjamboMay 30, 2018 at 17:26 (Edit)
The response was by 22 May , shortly after we had the statement about the fitness of the SFA non Exec Hughes. Just saying.
Methinks there is a plot sitting in a lost property office in South Africa somewhere.
jimboMay 30, 2018 at 13:34
Let me word this better so it makes sense!
In my heart of hearts I think it is a new club.
—————————————————-
Jimbo, that is just Whataboutary, why bring Hearts into it? They reached an agreement with creditors and exited Administration, with history intact!
Excuse my ignorance but what does JPDT stand for?.
First shots fired in all-out-war as Rangers start to fight back…
FFS.
AuldheidMay 30, 2018 at 17:38
AllyjamboMay 30, 2018 at 17:26 (Edit)The response was by 22 May , shortly after we had the statement about the fitness of the SFA non Exec Hughes. Just saying.Methinks there is a plot sitting in a lost property office in South Africa somewhere.
__________________
Thanks, Auldheid. Transparently kept out of sight then
http://c.newsnow.co.uk/A/940063445?-11344:801:3
Sorry about prevoius meant to send link..But really FFS
Madbhoy
The SFA and SMSM are perhaps going to find out that if you sup with the Devil, you need a long spoon!
Just in case anyone has forgotten. In among us all filling the blog in this ‘summer silly season’ period with talk of Celtic moaning about pitches, replaying the oldco/newco arguments again and Kings latest piece of hubris, there is still an offer of 20p to be made to existing Ibrox shareholders and a new share issue to sort out to supposedly raise £6m, that could well be spent already.
Just saying likes!!
C’mon anyone. I need to know >>>>JPDT
Valentinesclown
Utterly bonkers stuff, all this military obsession has set them daft.
Billydug, its the most recent SFA investigation into RFC euro licence under the Judicial Protocol Disciplinary Tribunal or something similar methinks.
C’mpn Billydug, keep up! That was last months T’Rangers problem, you know the one after the TOP ruling, before the Court of Session ruling but before the hopefully forthcoming disrepute charge.
Sorry Billydug, i’ve just remembered the JPDT thing its over 9 months since the Compliance Officer started looking into the 2011 euro licence so we can all be forgiven forgetting about it. Maybe that was plan a, plan b is the convening of a JPDT once they find ‘the best man for the job’ like last time.
Right, that 2 too many posts from me, away for a rest.
BAD CAPT MADMANMAY 30, 2018 at 18:31
Thank you.
If you blink you can miss a statement.
Isn’t it time the Scottish football authorities hit King with a disrepute charge?
Goodness knows how Dave the rave is going to react when he discovers fellow directors Messrs Park have a business relationship with Celtic?
WOTTPI
MAY 30, 2018 at 18:18
==========================================
Just a feeling but I think the share issue stuff is becoming less clear.
Are all of the people who have been saying they are willing to swap debt for equity still going to be doing that.
I’m not convinced with regards anyone associated to Barry Scott, or as time passes King himself. If he isn’t willing to do it then why would anyone else. Breaking in mind he has promised another £3m this year, and the accounts will show whether he put the additional £4m in last season.
The good people at follow follow are not happy with the other clubs (non) reaction to Mr King’s calls.
This has collected a load of support.
BP, Tris
Apologies for my last post which is in moderation. I lifted the quote straight from another site and omitted to edit the language.
Googled to find this from July 2017. The last paragraph shows that MacLennan’s involvement with INM was widely reported at that time. Is DCK insisting that any appointments to SFA/SPFL positions must include full disclosure of who the appointee works beside; socialises with, drinks with etc?
http://www.thedrum.com/news/2017/07/12/telegraph-s-murdoch-maclennan-joins-scottish-professional-football-league-chairman
I know King is an a*se who is just hitting out with anything, even though he/his old club were more conflicted than the people he is charging, but it is interesting that all his follow follower sites are behind him and absolutely no one is self aware enough to consider the ‘possible’ conflicts when Ogilvie and Gordon Smith were at the head of these authorities.
valentinesclownMay 30, 2018 at 17:58
http://c.newsnow.co.uk/A/940063445?-11344:801:3Sorry about prevoius meant to send link..But really FFS
__________________
Once again, I am convinced that was written by the Clumpany, it is so full of irony. It is a perfect pastiche of how the bear sites come across when viewed from outside the Ibrox bubble, and could only be written by someone determined to highlight just how devoid of reality these peepil can be.
Alternatively, it was written by whoever penned those TRFC statements.
Perhaps since he has gone the full leggoland he has a new PR man who is laying down a lot of smoke chaff and other counter measures.
Is King implying because Murdoch MacLennan has interests in a media group which has two shareholders who are also Celtic shareholders MacLennan is likely to act in Celtic’s interests over the interests of other clubs? Is he implying the two Celtic shareholders in question would expect MacLennan to act favourably towards Celtic because of their joint links? I don’t know the answer to either question but, I believe if any of Kings future statements lean towards suggestions of impropriety on the part of Dermot Desmond and Denis O’Brien he may find it is one battle he wishes he had never gone near.
But……wouldn’t all these investigations just cost money better used to help grass roots football in Scotland….Dave……Dave…
These statements o’clock are now causing serious laughter problems.
Reading that link that Nawlite posted, I’ll say one thing for Murdoch Maclennan, he has quite a CV!
Btw, we don’t even know if he supports Celtic!
How it must feel if you are a member of staff at RIFC/TRFC ?!
Your head must be spinning on a daily basis with all these public rants – and whilst nobody inside Ibrox / Murray Park seems to know what the hell is going on?
King reminds me of the Wizard of Oz: a wee diddy hiding behind his curtain in South Africa, pulling levers to spread fear, confusion, uncertainty throughout RIFC/TRFC, and probably throughout the SFA & SPFL as well.
You would think that with the walls closing in, TRFC would be desperately looking to make friends, build bridges, etc… [I know].
ALLYJAMBOMAY 30, 2018 at 17:26
Talking of responses, have TRFC responded yet to the review of the 2011 Euro License? I’m sure they had until a date prior to the end of May (think it was before today) to give their response to the SFA.
—————
May 22 to respond June 26 principal hearing.
Ok i have the popcorn out.
Friday is the usual statement o’clock from ibrox. Are all these little statements leading up to Friday’s Big one?
re-the dave king statements,i think it is bigger than a no euro license,let’s face it they ain’t going to make any money from it
CLUSTER ONEMAY 30, 2018 at 20:34
Ok i have the popcorn out.Friday is the usual statement o’clock from ibrox. Are all these little statements leading up to Friday’s Big one?
=======================
Gerrard arrives on Friday. I presume there will be a press conference. Would King be prepared to hijack it to keep the pot boiling or will there be strict instructions issued to the assembled poodles on what they can and can’t ask?
StevieBC
This had me in stitches – I’ll never look at that movie in the same way again!
Upthehoo- one potential plus for the rest of us in Gerrard’s appointment is that hopefully any English journalists who turn up at Ibrox will ignore and laugh off any attempt by Level 5 to stop them doing their jobs. (Well, with the possible exception of Tom English, – has he succumbed to Traynor’s bullying?- I wouldn’t know)
I feel that I must be missing something here…
The SPFL Board consists of Shifty McGifty (Chairman), Karyn McCluskey (NED), Ann Budge (Hearts), Les Gray (Hamilton), er, Stewart Robertson (The Rangers), Martin Ritchie (Falkirk), Warren Hawke (Morton) and Iain Dougan (Stranraer)
If we apply GASL logic, the entire Board should recuse themselves from any and every decision that they have to make since they are all conflicted due to their associations with certain Clubs.
Or does it only matter if there is a tenuous link to Celtic?
Auldheid
Nobody does irony better. Mind you they don’t realise they are doing irony so it’s probably just self-delusion, denial and wilful misleading of the masses.
The incredible hypocrisy of “must have levels of probity and governance that are beyond reproach”.
BFBPUZZLED is right he’s definitely gone legoland! Phrase worthy of a copyright, I think!
CLUSTER ONEMAY 30, 2018 at 20:34
I like to refer to this as …
#FurFuxakeFriday
THE_STEED
MAY 30, 2018 at 21:35
====================================
You must have missed the memo.
We are simply ignoring the inconvenient truth that a Rangers employee actually sits on the board.
A real Rangers employee, not someone on the board of the PLC holding company.
A highly experienced professional who is on the board of a company which two Celtic shareholders also own shares in is much more sinister. Not that that’s defaming any of their personal integrity and bringing the game into disrepute obviously.
I am hoping upon hope that the SFA just let off a final salvo towards the Tribute Acts goggle eyed leader along the lines of:
“Yer Clubs deid mate…”
I see you got an honourable mention in JJ’s dispatches this week Homunculus.
???
So what do you think of my Dave King inspired Avatar?
JUSTTHEFACTS
MAY 30, 2018 at 22:00
=========================================
Nice one, which is it.
1, I’m hanging on his every word.
2, He is going to punch me to the ground.
3, I am not well endowed.
4, I have a questionable intellect.
5, All of the above.
Armchairsupporter
For the avoidance of doubt and avoiding any charges of plagiarism “the full leggoland” is not mine but was from another SFM person. I cannot remember who it was though. It is a great phrase though and there are other blogs which could replace “leggoland” in it. I would say though that “the full bears den” is many degrees (possibly Masonic degrees) beyond Leggoland -or as my Tennessee buddy would say “whack job”
Homunculus
Are you suggesting that he is predictable?
Ps he really should apologise for making false accusations and threats of violence. And me a wee old man who would never say boo to a goose too or is that my brother?
THE UNGRATEFUL DEAD
MAY 30, 2018 at 22:40
=============================================
Quality, what is the perceived affront this time.
Or is he just trying to make his blog relevant by picking fights with blogs which actually are, or people who post on them.
BFB was his latest target if I remember correctly, or possibly Jimbo.
It’s amazing to see posters on Rangers Media, who were previously completely against King, now back him because of 1) the appointment of SG and 2) challenging the football authorities head on.
It appears that some mind altering drugs are at play ……… most likely L.S.D. is both its forms.
BFBPUZZLED
MAY 30, 2018 at 22:36
===============================
Why would anyone say boo to a goose. What possible purpose would that serve.
easyJamboMay 30, 2018 at 22:48
‘..It appears that some mind altering drugs are at play ..’
__________
I have from time to time hoped that some student of journalism, or of media studies, or of the psychology of mass hysteria, or business ethics, and so on, would come on to this blog to let us know that the ‘saga’ in all its manifestations forms part of their research material for their Ph.D theses!
It seems to me be to manna from heaven! What is there not to investigate and research?
One hesitates to mention what happened to academics and the ‘free press’ in Nazi Germany, when university people were dismissed and journalists simply became agents for Nazi propaganda and the rantings of an at least half-insane ‘fuhrer’.
One hesitates,because one would not wish to draw any parallel with any Level above level 4 of current PR effort.
Or, more simply, to cut the crap, Level 5 have lost it!
For the FC to allow himself to be even associated with the rantings of King let alone have the world believe that Level 5 crafted the ‘statements’ of his ‘client’ sounds, I would say, the death knell of his PR operation!
Who, or which company, would ever use such an ineffective PR agent?
Part of today was spent in the dreadful business of pensioners’ discount day at B &Q.
I love my wife dearly, but see when it comes to ‘that bedroom needs to be done’ and ‘the sitting room’s a disgrace’ and ‘as for the kitchen…’ I do what the rest of most of you do: what Ah’m telt!
So today’s stuff on the blog has been a wonderfully entertaining affirmation of truth and reality and common sense, which cheered me up.
See tomorrow? see stripping wallpaper? see doing all that stuff? Not my bag at all.
But it has to be done.
Just as truth in Scottish Football has , however painfully, to be restored and re-affirmed.
JC
The truth now, please. There wasn’t any court case the other day, was there? That whole – oh I went to the wrong court and didn’t realise for three hours – schtik, was all made up, wasn’t it? No wonder you were giving it – oh those judges, you can hardly hear them! Especially from Asda.
HOMUNCULUSMAY 30, 2018 at 22:19
JUSTTHEFACTSMAY 30, 2018 at 22:00=========================================
Nice one, which is it.
1, I’m hanging on his every word.
2, He is going to punch me to the ground.
3, I am not well endowed.
4, I have a questionable intellect.
5, All of the above.
====================================
Plagiarism coupled with the fact he’s now apparently a Muay Tai 15 dan with the physique of a Middleweight and may or may not spark you out (with a specialist Tekken inspired inch punch) should your paths of spiritual enlightenment ever cross.
Or something like that.
Given all the bluster it seems to me at least that Steven Gerrard’s ascension up the marble staircase will not transpire this week. I know he was busy with TV commitments but he has not made a single comment about Rangers since he was last in Glasgow (as far I’m aware) and he became manager elect. If Mr King is acting unilaterally and the board are not consulted about anything significant then SG would be unwise to put himself in the middle of a civil war. A house divided against itself cannot prosper. Indeed he also might view being a World Cup pundit as a more acceptable gig as I believe England are sending a team and he was s former captain with multiple caps to his name. I’m certain I read that in all of the Scottish newspapers and broadcast media.
If he doesn’t trap on Friday then I can guess who Mr King is going to blame.
EASYJAMBOMAY 30, 2018 at 22:48
It appears that some mind altering drugs are at play ……… most likely L.S.D. is both its forms.
—————
There is an old saying and it goes something like this.
Put the Glue down and move away from the bag…..Mr king
EX LUDO 01.52
Can i ask you why the recent statements from Dave King would dissuade Steven Gerrard from taking up his post as manager on Friday?.
He replied to the many birthday wishes on social media yesterday by stating “2 days to go”, which seems to me at least, that he will be arriving as planned. He has also had conversations with at least one player i know of, in an attempt to convince him that his future would be best served by staying with Rangers.
MAY 30, 2018 at 21:35
39
0 Rate This
I feel that I must be missing something here…
The SPFL Board consists of Shifty McGifty (Chairman), Karyn McCluskey (NED), Ann Budge (Hearts), Les Gray (Hamilton), er, Stewart Robertson (The Rangers), Martin Ritchie (Falkirk), Warren Hawke (Morton) and Iain Dougan (Stranraer)
————————-
There has been Celtic employees on that Board also and the rule is that none of the employees can vote on anything related to their club. So anything that directly affects Rangers, Robertson needs to stand aside.
What King is saying is that MacLennons links to the two top shareholders was not disclosed. Reading between the lines it looks like the SPFL were open with the company he also worked for but did not disclose the Conflict of the major shareholders.
The fact that he can influence and vote on matters relating to 2 major shareholders is where the issue lies.
If anyone can please be honest enough to consider this. Let’s say, it was found out that he worked for a company that was 50% owned by Dave King and Alastair Johnston and that the connection was not disclosed to other members, would everyone be comfortable with that appointment and governance ?
I think King is a lunatic, but I think he is spot on with these 2 issues. He had to get something right I suppose.
For the avoidance of doubt, I’m one of his haters on Rangers Media and the statements have not changed my views on him. I’m still a hater.
Please please please make it be Alfredo!
SlimJim: “(Gerrard) has also had conversations with at least one player i know of, in an attempt to convince him that his future would be best served by staying with Rangers.”
Why would he/someone think he needs to be convinced his future needs to be at NewGers if all was well?
Homunculos, your ‘friends’ last threat to you is easilly one of his best. He has now ‘reverted to boxing’, and ‘aquired a certain prowess in Muay Thai’
. Presumably from the Kung Fu Tims? I would love to know why you seem to bear the full brunt of his rage?
SJ, it’s a question of mood music. Mr King has made a couple of challenging statements in the past few days in what appears to be a classic deflection move to prepare his audience for imminent bad news. Others on here have speculated that there could be an issue with the UEFA license however I am suggesting that it could also be in relation to the appointment of the new manager. Of course these two factors might be related in that Rangers without a European license would be a less attractive option for SG.
if as you say he’s been working behind the scenes to convince a current player to stay then that indicates that there is a degree of unhappiness/uncertainty among the playing squad about what their future holds.
I commented yesterday with something of a wry smile that some SFM regulars who had long wanted an independent investigation into Scottish football governance seemed strangely angry that Dave King had called for an investigation into Scottish football governance…
This comment was not well received.
The main objection (perhaps understandably) was, why have an investigation into this issue but not an investigation into xxx historic issue. Then the dozens of historic issues we’re all aware of were recounted back to me at length along with what the posters considered acceptable resolutions to them. I agreed with some of what was said and disagreed with other parts but what struck me was that if you look at the very specific point King has raised re Maclennan there hasn’t really been much in the way of coherent argument to suggest he’s wrong.
Conflicts of interest happen everywhere, they are particularly common in self governing bodies like those so prevalent in football. That isn’t in itself a problem, the risk can be mitigated in various ways as long as that interest is declared. The conflict in this case doesn’t appear to me like it should have been a deal-breaker in terms of Murdoch Maclennan’s appointment, arguably his embarassing tenure at the Telegraph should have been but I’m of the opinion the conflict could and probably still can be managed.
Lets be clear though there should have been a comprehensive declaration to the board by Maclennan that there was at least the potential perception of a COI. The SPFL’s defence that “a non-executive position on a PLC does not constitute a business relationship between that individual and a minority shareholder in that company” is questionable indeed. Even if we ignore Dennis O’ Brien who has a controlling stake in INM and his close personal relationship with Dermot Desmond then it’s still beyond question that to achieve the highest levels of corporate governance he should have declared the latter’s involvement in INM.
Desmond is widely believed to exert significant control over Celtic’s affairs with him being credited with key operational decisions such as the appointment of Brendan Rodgers. As the owner of 15% of the shares of INM he would also be entitled to call an EGM to have Maclennan removed from the board of INM.
That’s the crux of it, if Dermot Desmond disliked a decision that Maclennan makes at the SPFL he could massively embarrass him with INM and possibly see him removed from office. I would suggest the SPFL board would have deemed that an unlikely scenario but possibly removed Maclennan from any decisions specifically related to Dermot Desmond for example if any issues arose around his F&P status. That’s what the highest standards of corporate governance are about, complete transparency to mitigate the risk of even the possibility of a conflict of interest or breach of fiduciary responsibility.
The responsibility to tell the board of the SPFL about Desmond’s involvement with INM sat with Murdoch Maclennan, not with Dermot Desmont or with Celtic and it most certainly wasn’t up to Rangers, Hearts, Hibs etc to investigate and work it out.
There’s no conspiracy here, the media world is a cliquey one and these scenarios will arise. This is however an example of a dysfunctional organisation displaying dubious levels of corporate governance. Responding to this with “ah but Sevco” or “what about that Campbell Ogilvie cad” doesn’t really address the issue at hand.
I’ve posted a few times I am pretty ambivalent about the OC/NC debate, like every law abiding citizen I think people should pay their taxes and their debts and shouldn’t be able to welsh on them Scot-free so to speak, however I also enjoy the fact that “Rangers” are dismantling their own dignified legacy brick by brick:
Regular gubbings by their arch-rivals – check
Chaos in the dressing room – check
Chaos in the boardroom – check
Chaos in the manager’s office – check for past 3/awaiting #4
League status <2nd – check
Empty trophy room – check
Finances in disarray – check
Transfers played out in the public domain – check
Transfer bids failing in the public domain – check
Dignified boardroom silence replaced by noisy public rants – check
Paranoid fans howling at the moon – check
Blaming everyone else for their problems whilst not fixing one of them, ensuring they happen all over again – check
Second liquidation, the big hoose sold and pitch plowed over and sowed with salt – TBC
Squirrels are up early today. Must be very bad news coming…
Nick May 31, 2018 at 09:06
=====================
You seem prepared to dismiss Campbell Ogilvie’s admitted conflict of interest as not relevant. Why is it any different?
Do you believe that RIFC director Douglas Park is conflicted, from a Rangers or SFA point of view, by holding shares in Hamilton Accies, and that the company he owns provides transport services to (say it quietly) Celtic?
That’s appears to me as having more of a conflict of interest in a business sense than the SPFL Chairman’s involvement in a non footballing business.
Nick
I think I posted that conflicts of interest do occur and as long as they are known the rules can cater for it.
For example the SFA Licensing Commitee has such a rule and chances are Andrew Dickson used it in 2011 to stay silent on the decision to grant a UEFA licence to Rangers. Should he have done so is for SFA JPDT to now ponder.
But taking your point about non declaration, Dickson was involved in that for 6 years at least as admitted in his FTT testimony.
However LNS decided it was an administrative oversight only and imposed a fine.
My point being Dickson is still there and has not stepped down so why should the SPFL Chairman, unless he is being accused of being untrustworthy by DK regarding what was a simple oversight?
If rules are in place to declare interests and the SPFL Chairman’s are now understood, then why should he step down?
I’d thank DK for pointing out an administrative loophole, the impact of which is now negated as result of DK raising the point.
Dickson is now a Director at TRFC I believe and has a position on an SPFL Advisory group. Should he be?
NICKMAY 31, 2018 at 09:06
I have no time for the chummy world of boardroom cohorts were there is a mates charter to pass around various positions and salaries and poor performance doesn’t seem to enter in to equation when managing to get your snout into the trough.
But lets get serious here, we are talking about an alleged conflict of interest with many potential degrees of separation being made by a MAJOR CONVICTED TAX CHEAT.
While I don’t want to get into an argument about shooting the messenger lets get real and acknowledge this particular person should be nowhere near Scottish Football, let alone parade around as the chairman of one of our largest clubs.
That is the real disgrace in terms of corporate governance.
To be honest I think we are finally straying into Charles Green ‘P*** Friend’ territory so that some form exit can be obtained.
The parallels are there for all to see. He may be in South Africa but King is doing no more than doing the long distance equivalent of walking up and down the season ticket queue conning people.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dR7nb9CWVTE
JOCKYBHOY & EX LUDO
I disagree that by trying to convince a player to stay, then it somehow indicates that “all is not well behind the scenes”. It might simply be that the player concerned is the subject of interest from a club playing at a higher level than the SPFL.
SLIMJIMMAY 31, 2018 at 09:54
I’ll bite.
Who’s the player and what’s the level?
Even if you don’t know directly, take a shot just out of interest.
Homunculus
When beset by geese one often is required to shout to chase them away.
A Robin lives in my back yard, like many of his type it believes itself to be some kind of avian ninja martial arts expert and is given to tweeting loudly and generally puffing itself up laying out all kinds of bloodthirsty threats. There is no need to shout boo at him for his threats like his head are empty (for the avoidance of doubt that is a wee Aesop’s fables type metaphorical story albeit the Robin is a real one and does behave like that)
as to the recent claims of the King over the water
As I understand it the relationship of the SPFL chairman to Desmind Dermot was declared before it was established TRFC knew. It can be embarrassing when the holding company chairman speaks on behalf of an operating company sometimes they do not know fully what is going on.
AuldheidMay 31, 2018 at 09:41
My point being Dickson is still there and has not stepped down so why should the SPFL Chairman, unless he is being accused of being untrustworthy by DK regarding what was a simple oversight?
If rules are in place to declare interests and the SPFL Chairman’s are now understood, then why should he step down?
I think you’ve misinterpreted my post Auldheid, if you read it again you will see that contrary to saying the SPFL Chairman should step down I actually said he probably shouldn’t have to step down.
My concern is that although it is good that the Chairman’s potential COI is now public it is not clear that the SPFL understand it or have put in place steps to mitigate it. In fact the SPFL seem to have taken the different approach of trying to deny in a slightly far-fetched manner that any COI exists at all.
The correct approach from a corporate governance point of view would have been to thank Rangers for raising the issue and reassure all members that proper controls had been put in place to mitigate the risk. The Chairman could then have apologised to the SPFL board for not disclosing the COI and the issue would be closed.
You’ve mentioned Andrew Dickson several times in your post, I don’t know enough about him or the history to debate any of your points raised. It does appear to me that he’s involved with the SPFL as a representative of a member club rather than an independent non-exec though so it should theoretically be even less problematic to create reasonable controls which mitigate his obvious COIs in that case.
Please tell me that you are neither surprised nor unfamiliar with this approach. Its been pretty well used for 6 years now.
Out of interest who raised the concern? “Rangers” or the apparently entirely unconnected Davie King? Tangled web etc etc
WOTTPI 10.00
Josh Windass & EPL.